Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

Good question. Time to renegotiate.

Although the fee could be a method to allocate pre-existing assets (cash and NCAA credits) to the 3 schools, in which case it would be reasonable.

We are paying because it is the deal we made. Will that deal get renegotiated?? Maybe, Maybe not. Tulsa will have the same issue soon.

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

I'm letting you know that this thread looks very much like a troll thread. I wouldn't call it a troll thread if you had a double-digit post count, but none of what I'm about to say is new information to you.

You know very well, or should know by now, that when the contracts were signed, with the exception of Tulane and ECU, seven football teams were joining a football league with 5 teams, a BCS-AQ bid and some chance to retain it, and the the expectation of a huge media contract partially based on having the only FBS programs within commuting distance of the nation's largest media market, plus the premier college basketball conference in the country. Given those factors, a $2.5M entrance fee was a pittance.

You also know that all of those things are gone.

It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated. (I believe that that will happen as part of a settlement.) However, you acting ignorant of everything that's happened since those entrance contracts were signed in 2011-12, as if you were a newbie poster who had just started asking questions about conference realignment, convinces no one.

I am not a CR mod. This is not an official warning. It's just a statement that you've been posting a long time, so asking questions that you know the answers to fools no one.

Disagree, John.. .this is one of Tall's posts that doesnt' look like a troll -thread... but that being said.. I'm gonna disagree with you on one part..

Quote:It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated.

Why? You do that and you're punishing the three schools that aren't (whether they want to be or not) leaving a contract they agreed to... while the rest of the schools are. This is why I have no sympathy for Maryland with their $50M exit fee issue... They agreed to be part of a group that signed on to that number.

Now if there can be a settlement reached, fine. But you cannot just "do away" with an exit fee that's in a signed contract (no matter what the date). {something I think BB learned, when he let USF escape C-USA without exit fees when they reached some sort of scheduling agreement}. Otherwise, why stick to _anything_ that's in the conference contract?

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

That is an excellent question Tallgrass. I keep up with realignment as much as the next guy and haven't stepped back and realized this observation until reading your post. You would think looking at this from a distance and not in incremental steps that the 3 would pay the 9. The thing the 3 have of value that I assume they will hold on to is a 2013 BCS autobid. Not sure how they split that 17 or so mil up.

(03-02-2013 09:03 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Disagree, John.. .this is one of Tall's posts that doesnt' look like a troll -thread... but that being said.. I'm gonna disagree with you on one part..

Quote:It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated.

Why? You do that and you're punishing the three schools that aren't (whether they want to be or not) leaving a contract they agreed to... while the rest of the schools are. This is why I have no sympathy for Maryland with their $50M exit fee issue... They agreed to be part of a group that signed on to that number.

Now if there can be a settlement reached, fine. But you cannot just "do away" with an exit fee that's in a signed contract (no matter what the date). {something I think BB learned, when he let USF escape C-USA without exit fees when they reached some sort of scheduling agreement}. Otherwise, why stick to _anything_ that's in the conference contract?

Actually, Marylands argument is that they didn't vote for that number.

With that being said this looks a lot like a bait thread.

arent the FB schools losing the name but keeping the history? i think the history of the BE is worth an entry fee

(03-02-2013 09:15 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  arent the FB schools losing the name but keeping the history? i think the history of the BE is worth an entry fee

I don't think thats the case. If the C7 are giving up all of the money left behind then they most likely get the history as well.

(03-02-2013 09:03 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Disagree, John.. .this is one of Tall's posts that doesnt' look like a troll -thread... but that being said.. I'm gonna disagree with you on one part..

Quote:It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated.

Why?

For some kind of a concession that the holdover schools want. Could be changing the exit fee bylaw, could just be not waging a pitched battle in court with the newcomers over anything and everything.

Also consider that, with 7/10 schools being new, they're getting back 70% of those exit fees anyway. USF will be getting about $350,000 a year for about 5 years, with 7 noob schools each paying $500,000 per for 5 years. (Temple pays 2013-2017, ECU and Tulane pays 2015-19, but close enough.) So voiding the exit fees costs USF about $1.75M, and lets UCF claim a gain of $2.5M. (It's a net gain of $2.5M - $1.75M = $750,000.

Quote:Otherwise, why stick to _anything_ that's in the conference contract?

Well, the Aresco League is going to be doing a top-to-bottom rewrite of the bylaws, and both sides can block any change. So pretty much everything is up for negotiation and compromise. They're basically starting a new league, and I'd rather start a league on the basis of some goodwill and cooperation than on the basis of squeezing your partners for nickels and dimes.

(03-02-2013 09:29 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 09:15 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  arent the FB schools losing the name but keeping the history? i think the history of the BE is worth an entry fee

I don't think thats the case. If the C7 are giving up all of the money left behind then they most likely get the history as well.

i hope so. it gets a little confusing when its stated that the c7 are starting a "new" conference but keepimg the name

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

There is a legitimate point here. The reality is that 3 schools are joining 6 other schools who have been competing together for a long time. Under the old NCAA bylaw requiring "Continuity", the 3 schools (without the C7) would not be able to move forward on their own as a qualifying conference and would need the other 6 to meet the Continuity requirement (which no longer exists).

I believe that the 6 CUSA schools do have options. They could withdraw their applications. UConn, Cincy, & USF would no longer qualify as an NCAA conference. The 3 of them could get together and sue the other 6 for the entrance fees. They would have legitimate grounds to do so, but the CUSA 6 could point out that the BE 3 no longer represent anything because their conference doesn't exist any more. They could claim that the BE3 are suing as individuals and as such ave no standing for damages since the entrance fee was to a conference which no longer exists, not to the 3 individuals.

Such a suit would be very messy and the BE 3 might actually win. But it would be so expensive, so messy, and so protracted that it wouldn't be worth the trouble especially since the CUSA 6 could go forward and play as a conference but the BE 3 would have nowhere to go. It would also expose the fact that the BE 3 are not the conference, would force its dissolution, and would force distribution of BE funds among other departing members.

Let's face it the nBE is a fraud as a continuing conference. This is a new conference that is emerging. As such, the entering members should not have to pay one dime of entrance fees because they are not entering anything. If anything, entrance fees should be the other way around. The old Big East became so badly mismanaged by its own members that it has been completely splintered and it pieces have literally been scattered to the four wins.

There is no nBE. The emperor has no clothes.

And I say this as a UConn fan who badly wishes that it had all worked out very differently. Ask me if I want to go to Memphis every year for the nBE tournament.

(03-02-2013 11:44 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

There is a legitimate point here. The reality is that 3 schools are joining 6 other schools who have been competing together for a long time. Under the old NCAA bylaw requiring "Continuity", the 3 schools (without the C7) would not be able to move forward on their own as a qualifying conference and would need the other 6 to meet the Continuity requirement (which no longer exists).

I believe that the 6 CUSA schools do have options. They could withdraw their applications. UConn, Cincy, & USF would no longer qualify as an NCAA conference. The 3 of them could get together and sue the other 6 for the entrance fees. They would have legitimate grounds to do so, but the CUSA 6 could point out that the BE 3 no longer represent anything because their conference doesn't exist any more. They could claim that the BE3 are suing as individuals and as such ave no standing for damages since the entrance fee was to a conference which no longer exists, not to the 3 individuals.

Such a suit would be very messy and the BE 3 might actually win. But it would be so expensive, so messy, and so protracted that it wouldn't be worth the trouble especially since the CUSA 6 could go forward and play as a conference but the BE 3 would have nowhere to go. It would also expose the fact that the BE 3 are not the conference, would force its dissolution, and would force distribution of BE funds among other departing members.

Let's face it the nBE is a fraud as a continuing conference. This is a new conference that is emerging. As such, the entering members should not have to pay one dime of entrance fees because they are not entering anything. If anything, entrance fees should be the other way around. The old Big East became so badly mismanaged by its own members that it has been completely splintered and it pieces have literally been scattered to the four wins.

There is no nBE. The emperor has no clothes.

And I say this as a UConn fan who badly wishes that it had all worked out very differently. Ask me if I want to go to Memphis every year for the nBE tournament.

Smart, reasonable post. We will be the #6 conference which isn't great, but is better than what could be. At the end of the day, an undefeated season should equal a playoff appearance for anyone here and at least a 4 bid league in basketball year after year. A low of 3 with a high of 6 is my guess. We have a good conference...not great, but not bad by any stretch.

(03-02-2013 12:38 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 11:44 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

There is a legitimate point here. The reality is that 3 schools are joining 6 other schools who have been competing together for a long time. Under the old NCAA bylaw requiring "Continuity", the 3 schools (without the C7) would not be able to move forward on their own as a qualifying conference and would need the other 6 to meet the Continuity requirement (which no longer exists).

I believe that the 6 CUSA schools do have options. They could withdraw their applications. UConn, Cincy, & USF would no longer qualify as an NCAA conference. The 3 of them could get together and sue the other 6 for the entrance fees. They would have legitimate grounds to do so, but the CUSA 6 could point out that the BE 3 no longer represent anything because their conference doesn't exist any more. They could claim that the BE3 are suing as individuals and as such ave no standing for damages since the entrance fee was to a conference which no longer exists, not to the 3 individuals.

Such a suit would be very messy and the BE 3 might actually win. But it would be so expensive, so messy, and so protracted that it wouldn't be worth the trouble especially since the CUSA 6 could go forward and play as a conference but the BE 3 would have nowhere to go. It would also expose the fact that the BE 3 are not the conference, would force its dissolution, and would force distribution of BE funds among other departing members.

Let's face it the nBE is a fraud as a continuing conference. This is a new conference that is emerging. As such, the entering members should not have to pay one dime of entrance fees because they are not entering anything. If anything, entrance fees should be the other way around. The old Big East became so badly mismanaged by its own members that it has been completely splintered and it pieces have literally been scattered to the four wins.

There is no nBE. The emperor has no clothes.

And I say this as a UConn fan who badly wishes that it had all worked out very differently. Ask me if I want to go to Memphis every year for the nBE tournament.

Smart, reasonable post. We will be the #6 conference which isn't great, but is better than what could be. At the end of the day, an undefeated season should equal a playoff appearance for anyone here and at least a 4 bid league in basketball year after year. A low of 3 with a high of 6 is my guess. We have a good conference...not great, but not bad by any stretch.

That's the way any of us has to think. This is an opportunity for any of these football programs to step up and do what TCU or Bose State has already done.

It's also a wonderful opportunity for any dormant basketball programs to capitalize on their association with a handful of more established programs to project themselves into the national spot light the way that Miami has in the ACC this year.

(03-02-2013 09:13 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 09:03 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Disagree, John.. .this is one of Tall's posts that doesnt' look like a troll -thread... but that being said.. I'm gonna disagree with you on one part..

Quote:It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated.

Why? You do that and you're punishing the three schools that aren't (whether they want to be or not) leaving a contract they agreed to... while the rest of the schools are. This is why I have no sympathy for Maryland with their $50M exit fee issue... They agreed to be part of a group that signed on to that number.

Now if there can be a settlement reached, fine. But you cannot just "do away" with an exit fee that's in a signed contract (no matter what the date). {something I think BB learned, when he let USF escape C-USA without exit fees when they reached some sort of scheduling agreement}. Otherwise, why stick to _anything_ that's in the conference contract?

Actually, Marylands argument is that they didn't vote for that number.

With that being said this looks a lot like a bait thread.

So anytime you are in an organization and you vote against something that passes you don't have to abide by the decision?

(03-02-2013 05:43 PM)lazydawg58 Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 09:13 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 09:03 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Disagree, John.. .this is one of Tall's posts that doesnt' look like a troll -thread... but that being said.. I'm gonna disagree with you on one part..

Quote:It's a fair argument to say that the exit fees should be eliminated.

Why? You do that and you're punishing the three schools that aren't (whether they want to be or not) leaving a contract they agreed to... while the rest of the schools are. This is why I have no sympathy for Maryland with their $50M exit fee issue... They agreed to be part of a group that signed on to that number.

Now if there can be a settlement reached, fine. But you cannot just "do away" with an exit fee that's in a signed contract (no matter what the date). {something I think BB learned, when he let USF escape C-USA without exit fees when they reached some sort of scheduling agreement}. Otherwise, why stick to _anything_ that's in the conference contract?

Actually, Marylands argument is that they didn't vote for that number.

With that being said this looks a lot like a bait thread.

So anytime you are in an organization and you vote against something that passes you don't have to abide by the decision?

Nbe is not an organization; it is a taxi strip.

(03-02-2013 11:44 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

There is a legitimate point here. The reality is that 3 schools are joining 6 other schools who have been competing together for a long time. Under the old NCAA bylaw requiring "Continuity", the 3 schools (without the C7) would not be able to move forward on their own as a qualifying conference and would need the other 6 to meet the Continuity requirement (which no longer exists).

I believe that the 6 CUSA schools do have options. They could withdraw their applications. UConn, Cincy, & USF would no longer qualify as an NCAA conference. The 3 of them could get together and sue the other 6 for the entrance fees. They would have legitimate grounds to do so, but the CUSA 6 could point out that the BE 3 no longer represent anything because their conference doesn't exist any more. They could claim that the BE3 are suing as individuals and as such ave no standing for damages since the entrance fee was to a conference which no longer exists, not to the 3 individuals.

Such a suit would be very messy and the BE 3 might actually win. But it would be so expensive, so messy, and so protracted that it wouldn't be worth the trouble especially since the CUSA 6 could go forward and play as a conference but the BE 3 would have nowhere to go. It would also expose the fact that the BE 3 are not the conference, would force its dissolution, and would force distribution of BE funds among other departing members.

Let's face it the nBE is a fraud as a continuing conference. This is a new conference that is emerging. As such, the entering members should not have to pay one dime of entrance fees because they are not entering anything. If anything, entrance fees should be the other way around. The old Big East became so badly mismanaged by its own members that it has been completely splintered and it pieces have literally been scattered to the four wins.

There is no nBE. The emperor has no clothes.

And I say this as a UConn fan who badly wishes that it had all worked out very differently. Ask me if I want to go to Memphis every year for the nBE tournament.

Melky, if you are a UConn fan (I have doubts) you're going to have to leave 1984 and get with the present. That is what Jeff Jacobs said in the Courant today.

Step One: forget Providence and Seton Hall.
Step Two: embrace Houston and UCF.

(03-02-2013 08:22 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  We are paying because it is the deal we made. Will that deal get renegotiated?? Maybe, Maybe not. Tulsa will have the same issue soon.

I hope not. Unless the TV contract is bumped up if Tulsa joins, I don't want them. If they're just one more mouth to feed and the pie doesn't get any bigger ... forget it.

Possibly with 12 we get a playoff game and that would make adding Tulsa a logical move?

(03-02-2013 08:44 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 11:44 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 08:11 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Makes no business sense. There is even no brand name to be had. At least, when a business person buys a McDonald's franchise, they get the McDonald's name.

On top of paying an entrance fee to a nameless organization, there is also an exit fee to be paid. When B1G expands to 16, then 2 of the 3 will take the entrance fees and run away.

It seems to me the 3 schools need the 9 schools more than the 9 schools need the 3 schools. As I look at the facilities and attendance and their past tv contract, what do the 3 schools bring to the table that the 9 schools don't?

There is a legitimate point here. The reality is that 3 schools are joining 6 other schools who have been competing together for a long time. Under the old NCAA bylaw requiring "Continuity", the 3 schools (without the C7) would not be able to move forward on their own as a qualifying conference and would need the other 6 to meet the Continuity requirement (which no longer exists).

I believe that the 6 CUSA schools do have options. They could withdraw their applications. UConn, Cincy, & USF would no longer qualify as an NCAA conference. The 3 of them could get together and sue the other 6 for the entrance fees. They would have legitimate grounds to do so, but the CUSA 6 could point out that the BE 3 no longer represent anything because their conference doesn't exist any more. They could claim that the BE3 are suing as individuals and as such ave no standing for damages since the entrance fee was to a conference which no longer exists, not to the 3 individuals.

Such a suit would be very messy and the BE 3 might actually win. But it would be so expensive, so messy, and so protracted that it wouldn't be worth the trouble especially since the CUSA 6 could go forward and play as a conference but the BE 3 would have nowhere to go. It would also expose the fact that the BE 3 are not the conference, would force its dissolution, and would force distribution of BE funds among other departing members.

Let's face it the nBE is a fraud as a continuing conference. This is a new conference that is emerging. As such, the entering members should not have to pay one dime of entrance fees because they are not entering anything. If anything, entrance fees should be the other way around. The old Big East became so badly mismanaged by its own members that it has been completely splintered and it pieces have literally been scattered to the four wins.

There is no nBE. The emperor has no clothes.

And I say this as a UConn fan who badly wishes that it had all worked out very differently. Ask me if I want to go to Memphis every year for the nBE tournament.

Melky, if you are a UConn fan (I have doubts) you're going to have to leave 1984 and get with the present. That is what Jeff Jacobs said in the Courant today.

Step One: forget Providence and Seton Hall.
Step Two: embrace Houston and UCF.

I'm not only a UConn fan, I'm a season ticket holder. I was at Gampel on Wednesday night with my son, getting my heart broken dueing the double OT loss to Georgetown. Why would you doubt that I'm a UConn fan? Are we all supposed to think the same way? I guess someone forgot to give me the script to read from.

I read Jacobs this morning. Jacobs, a Providence alum and a hockey beat reporter before he got the job a sea true writer, is playing to his audience. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I don't.

I'm not stuck in 1984. If I were, I'd still be hoping that UConn could leave behind its days as a Yankee Conference leader and Big East mediocrity. And I'd be thinking that Houston is a big time basketball school going to Final Flurs year after year.

Sorry, but I am not embracing UCF and Houston right now. Maybe that day will come, but right now I hate being stuck with this group of mediocrity. I hate the fact that our nearest opponent is in Philly. Despite the fact that I love Beal Street, I hate the fact that our conference tournament might be in some place like Memphis. Not a tournament I'll be attending every year like I used to.

Why in the world would a UConn fan be happy with all of this? And why would I suddenly start rooting against program that I've enjoyed a life time competing against. I have relatives who are graduates of Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall, Villanova, and Georgetown. I'm supposed to suddenly no longer be interested,in these programs?

Sorry but none of this works for me.